Re: [jose] #20: Shorter names for JSON serialization

[Richard Barnes <[e-mail]>]

"iv" and "tag" would be OK.  I still prefer "mac" over "tag", for
consistency with CMS, and just because I think MAC is a more uniformly used
phrase.

What about "data" for "payload" and "ciphertext"?


On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Vladimir Dzhuvinov / NimbusDS <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> +1 for "iv" and "tag"
>
> --
> Vladimir Dzhuvinov : www.NimbusDS.com : [e-mail]
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [jose] #20: Shorter names for JSON serialization
> From: Mike Jones <[e-mail]>
> Date: Tue, May 07, 2013 10:40 pm
> To: Richard Barnes <[e-mail]>, Jim Schaad <[e-mail]>
> Cc: "[e-mail]"
> <[e-mail]>, jose issue tracker
> <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
>
>   What about “iv” and “tag”?  For the other names, I’d
> actually prefer staying with those that are full words rather than those
> that are abbreviations of words, since they’re more descriptive.  But
> I agree that “initialization_vector” and “authentication_tag”
> were overkill.
>
>                                                              -- Mike
>
>  From: Richard Barnes [mailto:[e-mail]]
>  Sent: Monday, May 06, 2013 2:51 PM
>  To: Jim Schaad
>  Cc: jose issue tracker;
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]
>  Subject: Re: [jose] #20: Shorter names for JSON serialization
>
>  Even that's the name for the corresponding field in CMS
> AuthEnvelopedData and AuthenticatedData?
>
>
>  On Monday, May 6, 2013, Jim Schaad wrote:
>  I would be againist calling the authentication_tag mac.  I don't object
> to
>  something like AuthTag.  It is not necessarily a MAC in all cases so
> calling
>  it one make thing problematical - much like calling a mac a sig.
>
>  Jim
>
>
>  > -----Original Message-----
>  > From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf
> Of
>  > jose issue tracker
>  > Sent: Monday, May 06, 2013 2:29 PM
>  > To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
>  > Cc: [e-mail]
>  > Subject: [jose] #20: Shorter names for JSON serialization
>  >
>  > #20: Shorter names for JSON serialization
>  >
>  >  I noticed as I was doing some programming with the JSON syntax for
>  JWE/JWS
>  > that the current field names in the JSON format are unnecessarily
>  > cumbersome.  Nobody in the real world names a variable
>  >  "initialization_vector", it's "iv".   Proposed changes:
>  >
>  >  || OLD                     || NEW  ||
>  >  || signatures              || sigs ||
>  >  || signature               || sig  ||
>  >  || payload                 || data ||
>  >  || recipients              || keys ||
>  >  || ciphertext              || data ||
>  >  || initialization_vector   || iv   ||
>  >  || authentication_tag      || mac  ||
>  >
>  > --
>  >
> -------------------------+----------------------------------------------
>  > -------------------------+---
>  >  Reporter:  [e-mail]   |      Owner:  draft-ietf-jose-json-web-
>  >      Type:  defect       |  [e-mail]
>  >  Priority:  minor        |     Status:  new
>  > Component:  json-web-    |  Milestone:
>  >   encryption             |    Version:
>  >  Severity:  -            |   Keywords:
>  >
> -------------------------+----------------------------------------------
>  > -------------------------+---
>  >
>  > Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jose/trac/ticket/20>
>  > jose <http://tools.ietf.org/jose/>
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > jose mailing list
>  > [e-mail]
>  > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jose mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
> _______________________________________________
> jose mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
>